Mirrorless shopping

[pixmedic]

need some mirrorless options.
leaning towards a sony a7 (prices are pretty good on them)
but don't want to miss out on other options.
would like a system with a decent fast lens selection so i can eventually pick up some good glass for it. (something around the 40-150 f/2.8 range and maybe a 12-40 f2.8. maybe a prime or two)

also considering APS-C with the fuji line.....but the fuji lenses are really pricey.
considering m4/3 as well, but im a little unsure about dropping to that small of a sensor. lens selection is really good though, and its a compact system. i would probably be considering something like the older E-M1, E-M5, or E-M10 models with a fast zoom lens.

honestly, im trying not to go overboard. we rarely pick up a camera outside of client work so I don't want to drop a ton of money on something that is definitely going sit in the bag more often than not.
Viewfinder and hot shoe mount are a must have.

have I missed any viable options?
samsung maybe?
i really dont know very much about mirrorless cameras so i have a lot of research to do.
I will almost certainly be buying used or refurbished.

 

[cherylynne1]

Sony has very high quality lenses with Zeiss, but the native mirrorless line (E-mount) doesn't have any f2.8 zooms. They are all variable or fixed f4. There are a number of fast primes. Or, if weight and size are not a huge concern, you can add an adapter (LA-E4) and use the Sony A-mount line, which does have f2.8 zooms. I know for sure there's 24-70 and 70-200, but I'm sure there are also a few in the ranges you mentioned. The problem is that f2.8 full frame zooms are large by design, and no one's been able to fix that yet.

If you can deal with f4, there's a 18-105, 24-240, 10-18, 24-70, and 70-200, all available in the native E-mount. The full frame primes are really what Sony receives praise for, however. That new 25/2 Zeiss Batis gets killer reviews. So do the 35, 55, and the new 85 (which I'm lusting after.) c

Hope this helps!

 

[dxqcanada]

There is a “Sony event” coming the first week of February | sonyalpharumors

(SR5) This is the logo of the new Sony “G-Master” lens line! First lens is the 24-70mm f/2.8. | sonyalpharumors

 

[cherylynne1]

My poor heart can't handle SAR anymore...they get me all hyped up and then let me down over and over again....

On the other hand, the a6000 is almost two years old. And the price dropped to the lowest ever a couple months ago.

And is it so crazy to think that a 135/2 might be on the horizon? Or maybe they are going to release a 24-70 2.8, even if it is big and heavy? Or could they have figured out a way to balance it out well?

See, it's happening again. *sobs*

 

[jsaras]

The Olymus Pro 12-40
f2.8 lens (24-80mm equiv) makes a strong case for the m43 system. The lenses and cameras are small and the IQ is excellent. You can pixel-peep images on Flickr to get an idea of the capabilities of the system.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[pixmedic]

The Olymus Pro 12-40
f2.8 lens (24-80mm equiv) makes a strong case for the m43 system. The lenses and cameras are small and the IQ is excellent. You can pixel-peep images on Flickr to get an idea of the capabilities of the system.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have considered a m4/3 system, but let me give you some of my thoughts on that matter.
I had an Olympus E-PL5 a few years ago with some kit lenses and was unimpressed. i found the 3 axis IS to be...not so great. The button layout and controls were also pretty ponderous if you wanted to shoot in manual (which I did)
Granted, you really cant compare the E-PL5 to the E-M5 or E-m10 cameras, so I don't really know if I would fare better with one of those.
my other concern was stepping down from a FX sensor to a M4/3 sensor (being even smaller than DX)
I really like the low light performance of the FX cameras. But...you pay for the privilege of shooting Full Frame in higher camera and lens prices. For a camera I know I will rarely use...im hesitant to spend FX prices. The Oly PRO lenses are expensive, but the camera bodies a model back, like the E-M5 and E-M10, are not. even the MarkII versions of those cameras are well under $1k used.

my only serious consideration for a FX mirrorless would be the Sony A7. They can be had for under $1k.
lenses...kinda pricey though.
if I went the A7 route, I might just start with a prime or two and work into the $1k+ fast zooms.

I guess my biggest consideration for going M4/3 is that I can get an older top-end body for cheap, then supplement with good lenses. I wont have to drop $1k+ on a body AND $1k for each fast zoom.

 

[jaomul]

I'm not saying one is better than the other blah blah, because I don't know.

I have an Olympus em5. It's crap at continuous focus, but it's pretty damn good at everything else. The only thing is that it won't give you as much separation as bigger sensor cams, but it's going very cheaply. The super control panel (scp) allows touch focus and even takes the shot if you want it to. It's brilliant for portraits, just touch the eye etc and it's single focus speed is practically instantaneous, and you can bring it out in the rain, and it's light.

(Terms and conditions apply, Olympus have given a bag of lenses for this review )

 

[beagle100]

need some mirrorless options.
leaning towards a sony a7 (prices are pretty good on them)
but don't want to miss out on other options.
would like a system with a decent fast lens selection so i can eventually pick up some good glass for it. (something around the 40-150 f/2.8 range and maybe a 12-40 f2.8. maybe a prime or two)

also considering APS-C with the fuji line.....but the fuji lenses are really pricey.
considering m4/3 as well, but im a little unsure about dropping to that small of a sensor. lens selection is really good though, and its a compact system. i would probably be considering something like the older E-M1, E-M5, or E-M10 models with a fast zoom lens.

honestly, im trying not to go overboard. we rarely pick up a camera outside of client work so I don't want to drop a ton of money on something that is definitely going sit in the bag more often than not.
Viewfinder and hot shoe mount are a must have.

have I missed any viable options?
samsung maybe?
i really dont know very much about mirrorless cameras so i have a lot of research to do.
I will almost certainly be buying used or refurbished.

the Sony A7 is nice
an APS-C system is also nice for many situations
(especially with a $100 camera !)
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[IronMaskDuval]

Hey, Pix. Maybe I can chime in and give you some insight.

I've owned both the em-5 and em-10 and now, the A7.

The IBIS on the em-10 was absolutely amazing for slower shutter speeds, but that was only at shooting still life or still portraits. My primary lens was the Panasonic 12-35 f/2.8, which was a great lens, but I couldn't stand the fact that the depth-of-field couldn't get shallow enough for my liking no matter how offensively close I got to my subjects. Here's a photo that I took with it. The image quality is great, but I personally don't enjoy not being able to blur the background more. Unfortunately, I do not have a pre-green photo. The shop's theme was a vintage green kind of thing, and I dunno where I filed the original. The em-10 is a lot better than the em-5 mki except for the weather sealing. The evf, I believe is the same as the em1, is just much much better. The focus peaking is also great for legacy lenses. I can't say much about the auto focusing. I've never had enough of an issue with it to complain.

Now the A7 is a different kind of beast. It's what I shoot now, and I keep my 50mm Zeiss Planar manual focus on the lens as my everyday carry. It's the best camera that I've ever owned, and I think I am settling on this until a very long time. I'll be honest with you however, Sony is complete utter crap at understanding photographers, and the UX/UI is just horrible. The benefits, however, outweighs that mess.

First and I think most important for most people is the autofocus. It's sh*t. It's just sh*t. I don't know how else to put it. It is clumsy and worthless when anything moves faster than a tortoise rushing to get into the ocean. I don't even know why they make AF lenses for this thing. I will at times use the kit lens, because it's not that bad at all image wise, but it's spray and pray for anything that moves. That's just not my style. I only use manual lenses for this thing.

Next flaw is the focus point selection. FFS, everyone knows to move the single focus point, you just push your damn arrows. Nope, not Sony. You have to set a custom button to activate the feature, then you move the focus point from there, but be careful! If you accidentally wiggle your thumb and turn the wheel, it'll switch over to ISO, and you're left with a big mess. Another reason why I shoot manual focus.

The battery. For the love of god, Sony needs to make a battery magazine like the ones people use in Gatling guns.

Last big gripe is the auto-iso. If you shoot in M with auto-iso on, your light meter will not meter. Boo. I like to shoot auto-iso when I'm outside shooting something that moves from shad to sun quickly.

BUT, here are the benefits. The obvious is that it is full frame and you get your beautiful subject/background separation. It also has focus peaking to help you manual focus (eliminates focus selection points) so that you can buy legacy lenses to your heart's content. The evf is absolutely amazing. I no longer use my light meter, because the evf will show exactly how my exposure will come out based on the exposure settings that my camera is set to. It can mount old e mount lenses. Although cropped down to 10.~ mp, it still delivers an outstanding photo with the apsc lenses. Cropping down, you can buy the 20mm 2.8 and have yourself a compact street cam. It's small. It's light. It looks psuedo retro. All of the buttons, I rarely ever use any more. Shutter speed and release are generally the only ones I need anymore.

OH, I forgot. The shutter on the A7 sounds like someone slapping an elephant's ass.

I went from a D610 to mirrorless. I will never go back. The size and weight of these things are just too great to go back. The ability to shoot manual focus lenses because of focus peaking is also financially advantageous. I dunno. I think instead of helping, I just rambled.

 

[Solarflare]

Well, if I was forced at gunpoint to go mirrorless, I would pick Fuji. The Fuji X-T1 IR would be my pick because its the only camera I know of that gets IR and UV conversion by the original producer already (which is typically quite expensive and screws up the UI of the camera). The 27mm f2.8 Pancake seems to be tolerable for UV and the 23mm f1.4 and 18-135mm f3.5-5.6 OIS WR are good with IR. Also of course filters to mask whatever part of light you dont want to record right now.

Second choice would be MFT. The GH4 is a great video camera, thats what I would go for.

If somebody forced me to go Sony FE, my pick would be the A7s with Mitakon 50mm f0.95. A great lowlight combo, obviously.

About Fuji glas being expensive - so is a lot of Sony FE glas, but unlike Fujis offer, its not even worth it. Good Sony FE glas is atm: 16-35mm f4 OSS, 28mm f2, 35mm f1.4 (a huge prime), 55mm f1.8 and 90mm f2.8 macro OSS. Otherwise one could go for Zeiss Batis and/or Loxia lines, but they are ... well, far from completion. Adaption is an option, however there might be issues, because theres a glas over a digital sensor which wasnt necessary in film days, so that might lead to ugly effects.

 

[Gary A.]

I have MFT (EM1's) and APS_C (Xt1's, XP1's, X100S) ... I much prefer the IQ of the Fuji, The EVF of the Fuji and the exceptionally sharp and build quality of the Fuji lenses over my MFT lenses Oly/Panasonic/Panasonic-Leica. I found the Fuji to be a great compromise between the small footprint of MFT and the IQ of FF.

Yes, Fujinon lenses are on the more expensive side, but every XF lens I own is, at a minimum, equal to the equivalent 'L' lens at a significantly lower cost. (With XF you are purchasing a premium lens.)

Fuji makes a 16-55 f/2.8 and a 50-140 f/2.8. These are wonderful lenses, not small, not inexpensive, but deliver a great image up and down the entire focal lengths.

From Godspell:

16-55 @ 55mm

50-140 @ 94.5mm

and Fuji makes a 10-24 f/4

10-24 @ 10mm

 

[pixmedic]

Viewfinder and hot shoe mount requirements have somewhat limited my choices. In fuji, it looks like it would be between the x-t1 and the x-t10. Very similar cameras from what my research shows. The x-t1 is older, but has more dials and is weather sealed, with recent firmware updates bringing it in line with the newer x-t10's software advances. It's a tough choice...i like the fact that the x-t1 has an ISO dial, but the x-t10 is a few hundred bucks cheaper.

I do like fujis lens lineup.

 

[Gary A.]

The XP2 will be out in a few weeks. It reportedly has a 24mp APS-C sensor, improved AF and stuff. It has that sexy Leica/rangefinder look with a hybrid viewfinder. It's coming in at about $1600.

I think there may be a lot of used XT1's floating around when the XP2 is launched.

If you like primes, Fuji's primes are pretty amazing.

Remember that with EVF's you'll get blackouts between shots. It will take a bit to get used to. I have trained myself to sorta ignore the blackouts in order to minimalize the annoyance. Today I shot more theatre and I purposely un-ignored the blackouts. And yep, the blackout are there and they are annoying. The XT1 EVF is huge and wonderful ... But you have to learn to adapt to the blackouts, especially when shooting in continuous mode.

 

[jaomul]

Viewfinder and hot shoe mount requirements have somewhat limited my choices. In fuji, it looks like it would be between the x-t1 and the x-t10. Very similar cameras from what my research shows. The x-t1 is older, but has more dials and is weather sealed, with recent firmware updates bringing it in line with the newer x-t10's software advances. It's a tough choice...i like the fact that the x-t1 has an ISO dial, but the x-t10 is a few hundred bucks cheaper.

I do like fujis lens lineup.

Just one thing to add, if you intend on editing raw files and Lightroom is your software of choice, do a little more ground work on this if you have not already. Fuji cameras are very nice, making very nice jpegs, but I believe you need kind of specific software to get the best from their raws

 

[pixmedic]

Viewfinder and hot shoe mount requirements have somewhat limited my choices. In fuji, it looks like it would be between the x-t1 and the x-t10. Very similar cameras from what my research shows. The x-t1 is older, but has more dials and is weather sealed, with recent firmware updates bringing it in line with the newer x-t10's software advances. It's a tough choice...i like the fact that the x-t1 has an ISO dial, but the x-t10 is a few hundred bucks cheaper.

I do like fujis lens lineup.

Just one thing to add, if you intend on editing raw files and Lightroom is your software of choice, do a little more ground work on this if you have not already. Fuji cameras are very nice, making very nice jpegs, but I believe you need kind of specific software to get the best from their raws

Was unaware of any issues with fuji raw files and Lightroom. I'll have to check into that. If I go fuji, I may wait until that new camera comes out and see if the prices on the x-t1 drop a little.